For
weeks King Kong has been playing at theaters, entertaining audiences
and raking in the money, with its amazing special effects and powerhouse
rendition of the greatest of Apes. I finally had a chance to see this
frightful beast in person, and was amazed at the humanity skillfully
and artistically presented from Kong. After all as evolutionists proclaim,
Kong and humans share a “common ancestor.” Little did I know that
the biggest monkey show in town was playing in a courtroom in Dover,
PA. As many already know, Judge John E. Jones III somehow read the
first amendment to disallow any mention of intelligent design purporting
it to be a violation of the establishment clause.

While
sitting in my well “designed” movie theater seat, I marveled at the
creativity of the directors, and the amount of thought they had put
into the movie to “create” this action packed blockbuster. The three
and a half hour movie gave me ample time to reflect on similarities
between King Kong, and the recent behavior of proponents of Darwinian
evolution. Proponents of evolutionary theory have been advancing their
cause much the way King Kong woos the beautiful movie screen starlet,
through brute force and intimidation. By using lawsuits, threats of
lawsuits, personal attacks, misinformation, and half-truths proponents
of Darwinian evolutionary “dogma.” advance their crusade against all
things supernatural. With religious zeal and fervor the guardians
of “science” have attempted to squelch any academic dissent to Darwin’s
theories.

Let
me first qualify what I mean by evolutionary theory. There is a difference
between microevolution (intra-specific, which Creationists agree with)
and macroevolution (particles to people, inter-specific changes).
Creationists understand that genetic variation exists and animals
undergo small changes (adaptations) in response to the environment.
However, macroevolution asserts that a once distinct fully formed
species given enough time (billions of years) could evolve into more
complex species. Essentially, that particles can become people given
enough time and the right circumstances (quite a leap of faith).

After
the Dover decision, Darwinian proselytizers stood and began to pound
their chests. Calling Dover “Scopes II”, they claimed a jubilant victory
over this thorn in the evolutionary side called ID.

Ohio
has now been put in the crosshairs of evolutionary activists. As reported
by the Columbus Dispatch Jan 12th ed., on Jan. 10th, the Ohio School
board met and issued a 9-8 ruling favoring the continuing of Ohio’s
high school biology standards. “Martha W. Wise, a board member from
Avon, sought the resolution, arguing that Ohio’s 10th grade science
standards are flawed and could subject the state to costly litigation.”
Americans United for Separation of Church and State, a plaintiff in
the Dover lawsuit, is reviewing records from the state Department
of education for possible litigation in Ohio.

Currently,
Ohio standards do not mandate the teaching or testing of intelligent
design, and describe how “scientists today continue to investigate
and critically analyze aspects of evolutionary theory.”

The
pattern is clear. Since evolutionary activists can’t debate the merits
of Darwin’s theory fairly, critically, and objectively with public
science discourse; they will perpetuate their biased rationalistic,
materialistic, and uniformitarian philosophy through judicial fiat.
A prime example elucidating how the evolutionary activists have been
going bananas over Intelligent Design is that of evolutionist Tom
Baillieul dressing up as a Panda and standing outside the Ohio state
school board meeting on Monday, a play off the ID design book “Of
Pandas and People.”

In
addition to dressing up in Panda suits or threatening lawsuits, evolutionists
often resort to character assassination to discredit the “scientific
ability” of the person supporting ID. Interestingly, 52 scientists
from Ohio came out in support of the Ohio standards of academic freedom
allowing critical analysis of Biological origins and Darwinian Theory.
They were scientists with Ph D’s in chemistry, nuclear physics, Biology,
engineering and many other diverse physical and life sciences. This
stands in stark contrast to how evolutionary biologists portray those
who disagree with them.

They
assert that anyone that even hints at a possible Creator or Intelligent
Designer (emasculated Creator) would bring us back to the Dark Ages,
is a Neanderthal (to use an evolutionary term), or still believes
the earth is flat. One letter to the editor in Ohio compared proponents
of ID to the Holocaust revisionists.

Bryan
Leonard, a candidate for a Ph.D. in Science Education at The Ohio
State University knows this well. Earlier this year, Brian’s dissertation
defense was postponed through the efforts of evolutionary proponents
at OSU. Brian’s offense was to dare to investigate the impact of teaching
critical analysis of “macroevolution.” His dissertation attempted
to answer the following questions:

“When
students are taught the scientific data both supporting and challenging
macroevolution, do they maintain or change their beliefs over time?
And what empirical, cognitive and/or social factors influence students'
beliefs?”

It
was interesting that the faculty attempting to derail Brian’s scholastic
efforts alleged that he was unethical in choosing the faculty hearing
his dissertation. He had a biochemist and an entomologist, but not
an evolutionary biologist. Now he has an evolutionary biologist serving
as the “gatekeeper” preventing him from receiving his Ph. D. It raises
the question as to how the evolutionary biologists can even determine
what is ethical or unethical for if there is no Creator, then who
determines what is ethical or not, popular opinion, or the latest
gallop poll?

The
advocates of evolutionary thought and theory would attempt to frame
the debate as being between science and religion; that Darwinian evolution
is “scientific” and that ID is “religious.” He who frames the debate
wins.

The
real battle is a war of worldviews between God’s authority and man’s
autonomous reason. If man becomes the ultimate arbiter of truth, and
is able to discern moral truth apart from God’s revelation, then man
has become a law unto himself. This is lawlessness. Everyone is religious
they either worship the creation (evolutionary proponents) or the
Creator. (Romans 1:25)

The
Bible teaches that man has enough evidence in Creation and within
his own conscience, and they will have to give an account when they
die. “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness
and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God
hath showed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the
creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things
that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so they are
without excuse.” (Romans 1:18-20)

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Enter Your E-Mail Address:

Evolutionists
have suppressed the knowledge of God in unrighteousness. For now evolutionists
look like King Kong standing on a large tower of Babel. They are beating
their chests in fury, and raising their fists in defiance against
God, but they know that Darwinian evolution is failing as a theory,
and they are desperate. Soon the King Kong of Darwinian evolution
will plummet to the ground and Darwin will be but an interesting footnote
in history. And then, what will be their excuse?

Nick Jackson is
a physical therapist from Ohio who assists pro-life and pro-family ministries
in the Central Ohio area. He is executive director of Reform America,
a Christian Activist organization based in Columbus. For more information
on Reform America go to www.reformamerica.com

Evolutionists
have suppressed the knowledge of God in unrighteousness. For now evolutionists
look like King Kong standing on a large tower of Babel. They are beating
their chests in fury, and raising their fists in defiance against God...